sc_deploy

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits such as side effects, permission requirements, or environment impact. It only mentions 'automation' and 'workflows' with no details about production changes, irreversible actions, or potential risks.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. The phrase 'Deployment automation - Handle deployment workflows' provides no actionable information and fails to earn its place by adding value beyond the tool name.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity (4 parameters, nested evidence object, no output schema), the description is woefully incomplete. It does not explain what the tool returns, what workflow it executes, or any edge cases, making it inadequate for guiding an agent.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema describes all four parameters (args, flags, persona, evidence) with 100% coverage, so the schema already conveys most parameter meaning. The description adds no additional parameter context, keeping this at the baseline score.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Deployment automation - Handle deployment workflows' essentially restates the tool name (sc_deploy) with generic phrasing. It lacks a concrete verb like 'deploy', 'rollback', or 'validate' and does not clarify a specific resource or action, making it hard to distinguish from sibling tools such as sc_build or sc_migrate.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of scenarios like releasing to staging, production rollbacks, or validation steps, leaving the agent without context for correct selection.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.